Read a Book, Get Charged with Racial Harassment

By Selwyn Duke

The May 9 edition of the New York Post carries a short article by an Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis student named Keith John Sampson. He tells a story of being charged with "racial harassment" simply because he was "caught" reading an anti-Ku Klux Klan book. I'm not kidding. Sampson tells his story:

The book was Todd Tucker's 'Notre Dame vs. the Klan: How the Fighting Irish Defeated the Ku Klux Klan'; I was reading it on break from my campus job as a janitor. The same book is in the university library . . . .

But that didn't stop the Affirmative Action Office of Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis from branding me as a detestable Klansman.

They didn't want to hear the truth. The office ruled that my 'repeatedly reading the book . . . constitutes racial harassment in that you demonstrated disdain and insensitivity to your co-workers.'

The affirmative-action officer – who draws a salary of $106, 000 a year to perform her crucial role and is obviously a woman of inestimable intellect – neither examined the book nor spoke with Sampson. He wasn't guilty before proven innocent. He was just guilty.

To make a long story short, the charges were only dropped months later after the institution of lower learning came under pressure from the media, the ACLU (hey, even a blind squirrel . . .) and a more noble entity called the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

Since Sampson works as a janitor to, I would assume, help finance his education, he obviously wasn't born with a silver spoon in his mouth. Perhaps he was assumed to be one of those bigoted working class people of whom Barack Obama spoke. Anyway, it's good to see he is getting something for the many thousands of dollars he is paying to attend his illustrious Indiana university.

As outrageous as the story is, what is more troubling than the facts Sampson provided is what he omitted. He failed to identify the cultural forces responsible for his persecution or even hint at the wider problem. Perhaps the Post insisted he stick to only uncontroversial facts or maybe the fault lies with his own political correctness. It's probably both, as Sampson seems like a somewhat liberal man who is painfully naive about the power of the thought police (despite being victimized them).

For starters, Sampson fails to point out that the affirmative-action officer is a black woman named Lillian Charleston. Oh, that's not relevant? Sorry, but this is all about race. Mr. Sampson would never have been charged with racial harassment for reading a history book relating to the Klan were he not white; in fact, it's hard to imagine such a charge being leveled against a black person for any reason, given the double standards in the academy's politically-correct environment.

In case you're considering a career in the vital and growing field of affirmative action and wonder what credentials one must possess to become one of its storm troopers, here is Charleston's bio:

Lillian Charleston is nationally recognized for her expertise and knowledge of Affirmative Action and related issues. In addition to serving as the Affirmative Action Officer for IUPUI for the past 16 years, she previously worked as a desegregation specialist for the Indianapolis Public Schools. She has been an officer and board member of the American Association for Affirmative Action and the Indiana Industry Liaison Group. She also supports her community through active board service with the Indianapolis Metropolitan Development Commission, the Indianapolis Urban League, the Indianapolis Chapter of Big Sisters, and the Association for Loan Free Education. She earned her undergraduate and graduate degrees from Indiana University in Urban Studies, Counseling and College Student Personnel.

In other words, she specializes in grievance, social engineering, victimology and in what Rush Limbaugh has labeled get-even-with-'em-ism. To gain a little more insight into the mindset of this woman, read the letter she sent to Sampson about the charge:

Upon review of this matter, we conclude that your conduct constitutes racial harassment in that you demonstrated disdain and insensitivity to your co-workers who repeatedly requested that you refrain from reading the book which has such an inflammatory and offensive topic in their presence. You contend that you weren't aware of the offensive nature of the topic and were reading the book about the KKK to better understand discrimination. However you used extremely poor judgment by insisting on openly reading the book related to a historically and racially abhorrent subject in the presence of your Black co-workers. Furthermore, employing the legal "reasonable person standard," a majority of adults are aware of and understand how repugnant the KKK is to African Americans, their reactions to the Klan, and the reasonableness of the request that you not read the book in their presence.

During your meeting with Marguerite Watkins, Assistant Affirmative Action Officer [sic] you were instructed to stop reading the book in the immediate presence of your co-workers and when reading the book to sit apart from the immediate proximity of these co-workers. Please be advised, any future substantiated conduct of a similar nature could result in serious disciplinary action.

The letter reveals something else that should be obvious, which is that the individual filing the complaint against Sampson was also black. And this is another example of the relativistic standard applied in these matters. In other words, in judging the case, the Affirmative Action Office didn't analyze the action under the light of objective truth, but based on the feelings of a politically-favored individual, in this case an irrational one.

It much reminds me of a notorious sexual harassment standard about which I once read. To wit: If a woman feels as if she has been harassed, it is sexual harassment. It also brings to mind a quotation by John Stuart Mill:

“I can hardly imagine any laws so bad, to which I would not rather be subject than to the caprice of a man.”

One law (or policy) I can imagine that is so bad is one which subjects us to the caprice of other citizens. And this is increasingly America’s practice, as we’re now placing members of politically-incorrect groups at the mercy of the caprice of members of politically-favored ones. This does violence to the principle of human rights, as they are supposed to relate to God’s unchanging Truth, not man’s mercurial tastes. But in Sampson’s case, that his black co-worker felt aggrieved was justification enough to send out a lynching party. 

Of course, we’re also subject to the caprice of affirmative-action storm troopers, as their feelings are used to determine whose feelings will be the yardstick of racial justice. And it's hard to imagine a scenario under which their feelings would ever tell them that a white person's feelings should be thus exalted. This brings me to my next point.

Keith Sampson, being Catholic and partially of Irish descent, was attracted to the book in question because it tells a story of people of his heritage contending with the Klan. Now, since we’ve been enjoined to pay homage to racial and ethnic pride, since it’s cast as a new virtue, where was the respect for Sampson’s feelings of it?

Of course, fairness and leftist ideologues don’t have the same address. In creating abominations such as affirmative-action officers, diversity counselors and sensitivity trainers, we have empowered people of low character, often vile, ignorant, unintelligent individuals (who else enters such a field?) with degrees in nothing. Some are the epitome of the mediocre modern inquisitor, a person who holds the fate of far better men in his soiled hands as he ruins lives with the stroke of a pen and justifies his wanting existence.

As for the last matter, what do you think would happen if the Lillian Charlestons of the world didn’t bring home a few scalps every month? Well, like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and other racial hustlers, they would lose their raison d’etre. Thus, they just have to find racism somewhere; they must extract the necessary pounds of flesh. And it is usually white flesh.

This brings me to my last point. For many years now we have heard about data used to justify charges of racial profiling. It will be determined that an inordinate percentage of blacks are pulled over by police in a given area, and that alone is viewed as sufficient cause to change law-enforcement procedures. Even more to the point, many claim that since blacks constitute a percentage of the prison population greatly exceeding that of the general one, it's evidence of systemic "racism." 

So here is a study I'd like to see conducted. Let's ascertain the racial composition of those who have charges of racial harassment brought against them – and of those punished for same – on college campuses. Call me crazy, but I have a sneaking suspicion that virtually all those targeted are white.

Oh, yeah, I overlooked something. Only white people can be racist.

Let's just forget the whole thing.

                     Protected by Copyright

Comments

[Some Thing Wonderful God Made]

This is sad, what happened to Sampson. I think that law makers should not be in a haste to make laws based off offending the next man. In my opinion this only causes more division in a country where several different races have to live together. My desired thoughts are thoughts that would mean a country too close to perfect. Racism is real in every race yet not every person in a race is racist. Blacks are still looked at differently (not in a positive way) and there is a double standard not in favor of whites. What are we to do? Every one fighting for the rights to be in favor of thier race yet calling it equal rights. Can we ever really have equal rights? Not in a country with such an ugly history. Whites will always feel short sited and blamed and blacks will always feel used and cheated. While forieners will always feel lucky just to have gotten here. But only for the first generation.

[Spilt Milk]

No one has the "right" to not be offended. We have become a nation of weak, spoiled children and it will be the end of us.

[nomorelies]

This is just another example of how Americans are continuously losing their inalienable rights which are still guaranteed within the Constitution. Somehow, with all the problems we are facing today, we have forgotten the reason we have a government in this country. That government was created to protect the "RIGHTS" of everyone. Whether you agree or disagree with what a person is reading, you have no right to infringe upon his or her liberties. I am happy though to hear that Mr. Sampson was able to achieve a reprieval. In my opinion Mr. Sampson was attempting to get answers dealing with one of the most degrading and demeaning issues in our country, he should have never been "labeled" as a racist for attempting to seek answers to his questions. I actually commend him for his efforts. As for the stalin tactics that seem to be ever increasing in our country, I assume that Christians will be seeing more leftist attacks just like this one. Since Mr. Sampson is Catholic, who knows, he may be accused of being discriminatory again if he ever decides to speak on the truth of Jesus Christ on campus. We, meaning "We the People", need to take control of our country again. I wonder why more laws are being based upon how you feel rather than upon the violation of your rights. As far as I can remember, if a racist kills someone, they are guilty of "murder". Whether they get convicted or not is another topic of discussion. However, if a racist calls someone a derogatory name, so what, are they truly guilty of a crime? Free speech, oh yes I remember reading about that somewhere once. I suggest we get over it, because there is no infringement of your rights, only your feelings got hurt. By the way I do understand what it feels like to be a target of racism, but I find that the person spewing the insults is in far worst shape than I am.

[Jason]

I think a study should be done on the current rise of nationalism in the western world, its relation to traditional and conservative movements, and its impact on the political landscape in the foreseeable future. What I have see is a rising tension growing within the American people, this tension has its roots in the civil rights movement of the hippy 60’s and the generational changes that the world is currently undergoing. Many of the problems we face today as the Western world are related to the boomer generation, and their contempt for all things that remind them of their parents, the compromise of the last two world wars are now breaking down, new battle lines a being drawn, old enemies are now allies, and old allies are now enemies. I fear the worst is coming, a repeat of the past, and the horrors of both world wars will be visited upon the current generations of man. This clash between civilization, the western worlds decline and now growing rebirth into the fires of Nationalism. The 80’s and 90’s saw the collapse of western values, culture and racial demographics, now we see the rise of the Dragon, Mohammedans, and the Latin Soviets, the coming battles will be fierce and the worst of all, we Americans will be forced to fight not only the enemy within, but the New Visigoths to the south. Prepare my fellow countrymen, the time is nearly upon us, you have but a few years to prepare yourself for what is to come, the end of all things and the rebirth of the old.

[Jewel Atkins]

My daughters used to enter the Scholastic Art poster contests. They used to be the typical liberal tripe, you know, world peace, don't smoke, tolerance, eat more vegetables. Then, one day, the topic was Racism...and guess what, their experiences in school were vastly different than what was allowed on the posters. Their experiences on the bus were that the black kids who weren't mixed race and the hispanic kids (who weren't black!) were usually the most beligerently racist against the white kids. Since we live in a very diverse neighborhood, their friends were all usually mixed race or black hispanics...who were also victims of racism within their own groups. My kids have seen black racism on black kids and hispanic racism against others in their own group. Because we were taught never to think of ourselves as "whites" we simply don't identify with racial categories. They have always seen themselves as Americans.
So enter the poster contest, in which only the victims of racism appear to be black or something non white, and so they just quit fighting the system.
Art is prostituted for politics....again.

[4AK]

For an in-depth look at the racist witch-hunt that goes on in modern America and the extremely negative repercussions it has on ALL parts of American society (black and white and others as well), you should check Amazon for the book "Paved With Good Intentions: The Failure of Race Relations in Contemporary America" by Jared Taylor. Racism is alive and well, but it isn't whites persecuting black anymore...
http://www.amazon.com/Paved-Good-Intentions-Relations-Contemporary/dp/0786700254

[Doug]

I'd bet my bottom dollar that Lillian Charleston is obese.

[rjinar]

The reference to Rush's describing this as "get-even-with-'em-ism" gets close to the key dynamics. It's really Now I've Got You, S.O.B., which is a dysfunctional game spelled out by a fantastic psychoanalyst and pioneer in understanding dysfunctional human relationships, Eric Berne.

In a nutshell, a group (or person) who feels inferior or long-persecuted vis a vis another group (or person) finds themself in a situation where they are in a superior position to their oppressor. They obviously then take out all the built up rage on the oppressor, as well as revel in any other positive benefits in dispensing "justice". It can be summed up, by relating the joyous internal comment in their sick mind, Now I've Got You S.O.B. This superior position though may be a totally fabricated construct because the inferior really wants some revenge on their opressor, and will use the thinnest of pretexts, even if made up of whole cloth (see Mike Nifong and Duke Lacrosse case), to claim the moral high ground and superior position.

Obviously the dynamic periodically is displayed on a grand scale here in America with African Americans starring in the role of the inferior, and whites, and some times the police, starring in the role of oppresor. Specific manifestations include...Al Sharpton & Tawana Brawley vs. the white police, the African American jury vs. the police officers that stopped Rodney King, the A-A jury vs. Nicole Simpson, the A-A community of Durham and its proxy Mike Nifong vs. the Duke Lacrosse team, and countless thought-police on college campuses (like with this latest episode) vs. white students/professors.

[democrat]

It's not always the "oppressed" that pursues race-baiting agendas. In the example of Mike Nifong, it was he who was inflamming race and social injustices, not the stripper. It was he whom we saw in front of the cameras making statements weekly and in most cases, daily. He, a white prosecutor who attempted to ruin 3 white lacrosse players. Is he one of the "oppressed."
Whether we like it or not, history has a way of repeating itself, and in most cases, it isn't pretty. For a long time, other nationalities were forced to believe that their particular beauty and parts of their cultures were not to be celebrated. That if your skin was a little darker, your nose not "pointed," or your eyelids lacking a fold, that you were not beautiful. "Mainstream" beauty is anything that looks white, and in order to be successful, you must have white attributes. The younger generations aren't heeding to this nonsense any longer, and although I don't agree with the stances that they take, I do understand it. What we need to do is work with our children at home and make them feel special and important so that they don't take their frustrations out on others for simple things like race and ethnicity.

[MPA]

Having supervised Keith, I am convinced that he did this with the knowledge that he would make trouble. Keith is student, yes but he was working as a janitor before he started taking classes. So the "student" is a misnomer, because he actually an employee.
Regardless, knowing that Keith is a troublemaker and a rabble rouser, I can only guess that he was reading the material, not because he sided with Notre Dame, but because he empathized with the Klan. Keith has tried the "reverse discrimination" thing before and failed. He is surrounded by blacks in his line of work, most are his co-workers and others are his supervisors usually.

This was calculated, but he again failed to get any money, which is his true agenda.

[Dissertation Editing]

Blogs are so informative where we get lots of information on any topic. Nice job keep it up!!

[Dissertation Editing]

Blogs are so informative where we get lots of information on any topic. Nice job keep it up!!

[Dissertation Editing]

Blogs are so informative where we get lots of information on any topic. Nice job keep it up!!

[Rico]

If Keith was scheming (and I will take you on your word for that), then the university was mistaken in falling into his trap. A tolerant and diverse community should be more restrained than that.